: Toyota not content just to overtake GM... goes into high gear..



Playdrv4me
11-27-05, 07:22 PM
It appears Toyota's original target of 15 percent global market share (which would put it ahead of GM) was not really a target after all... rather just a stepping point to even further domination of the market. Also, this report states that Toyota is actually slightly *behind* NISSAN in profits?

http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20051127/AUTO01/511270335

ben72227
11-27-05, 08:11 PM
Well, Toyota probably lost some money because they started up Scion, started up the hybrids, AND they have to pay for the "crush GM" marketing campaign:p

Blackout
11-27-05, 09:48 PM
I bet you that Toyota will buy GM in the future. As GM continues to plumit *sp?* and Toyota continues to soar its only a matter of time

90Brougham350
11-27-05, 10:10 PM
Not a shot in Hell. GM will not be bought by Toyota, ever. GM is going to rebound. What, you think the company has never been through rough times before? What did everyone say back in '92? Does everyone think this is the end of GM? Ha.

Blackout
11-27-05, 10:11 PM
You'll see. Just like how we all thought Hyundai wasn't going to amount to much of anything. They're stealing up market share like there's no tomorrow!

SilverCTS
11-27-05, 10:24 PM
I bet you that Toyota will buy GM in the future. As GM continues to plumit *sp?* and Toyota continues to soar its only a matter of time

Maybe, but I don't think anyone would buy GM until they do some serious house cleaning.

Generally speaking, only healthy companies with a bright future are bought by other companies.

At this point, GM would come with a negative cash flow of about $2billion a year and all the pension plan / UAW baggage. Plus, Delphi, a GM spinoff, and it's largest part supplier just declared bankruptcy. Despite the bankruptcy, Delphi workers are threatening to strike, and this could choke GM's part supplies, and cause GM to lose even more money (believe it or not). Ultimately, GM might have to declare bankruptcy.

I'd really be surprised if Toyota wants any part of this...

ben72227
11-27-05, 11:39 PM
Most likely what will happen, is that GM will eventually implode, and Toyota will just take all of the market share. Basically, they won't NEED to buy out GM...

Elvis
11-28-05, 12:22 AM
Plummet:

aka Free fall.

aka Downward spiral.

aka Auger in.

aka Down the toilet.

aka In the shitter.

Playdrv4me
11-28-05, 12:35 AM
Nah, I dont think its so much about Toyota buying GM, as it is about Toyota more importantly wanting GM's *place* in the market. A takeover of GM would seem hostile and might have negative backlash, but no one could/would very much oppose a well engineered market dominance. It doesnt matter GM does or doesnt do if Toyota starts to eat away at all but the most loyal customer base it has.

Randy_W
11-28-05, 08:28 AM
You guys that talk about Toyota buying GM don't understand the situation. GM assets are worth more than twice as much as the total assets of all the Japanese car manufacturers combined!! They couldn't buy GM if they wanted to, they don't have access to that much cash.

Night Wolf
11-28-05, 12:34 PM
Yup, GM is going to go under next year.

Toyota is gonna buy GM in 2 years

Toyota is gonna buy Mircosoft...

then Exxon/Mobil

Then over throw the United States gov't....

you'll see, just a matter of time.

The world as we know it is going to end.

RobertCTS
11-28-05, 12:58 PM
Not to say it will happen again but remember the FEDS bailing out Chrysler Corp and Chrysler rebounding and paying off the debt in record time. Unfortunately it wasn't long lasting and the Kraults bought them out. It could happen again if things get to tight. China want to get into the American Oil Companies but the FEDS won't allow it. That could happen also.

SilverCTS
11-28-05, 08:30 PM
Yup, GM is going to go under next year.

Toyota is gonna buy GM in 2 years

Toyota is gonna buy Mircosoft...

then Exxon/Mobil

Then over throw the United States gov't....

you'll see, just a matter of time.

The world as we know it is going to end.

You're just joking, correct?

SilverCTS
11-28-05, 08:37 PM
Not to say it will happen again but remember the FEDS bailing out Chrysler Corp and Chrysler rebounding and paying off the debt in record time. Unfortunately it wasn't long lasting and the Kraults bought them out. It could happen again if things get to tight. China want to get into the American Oil Companies but the FEDS won't allow it. That could happen also.

That is probably true. I don't see the US Government letting GM degrade to the point where it is bankrupt, and then bought by Toyota. It is a no lose situation for the politicians. They will have overwelhming support from US citizens to bail out GM.

Also, someone mentioned that Toyota couldn't afford GM. I am not sure that is true. GM's market cap is only $12 billion. To put things in perspective, my company has a $35 billion market cap, and another bank just came in and swallowed us up whole.

However, I still think GM being bought by anyone is highly unlikely.

Randy_W
11-28-05, 09:48 PM
That is probably true. I don't see the US Government letting GM degrade to the point where it is bankrupt, and then bought by Toyota. It is a no lose situation for the politicians. They will have overwelhming support from US citizens to bail out GM.

Also, someone mentioned that Toyota couldn't afford GM. I am not sure that is true. GM's market cap is only $12 billion. To put things in perspective, my company has a $35 billion market cap, and another bank just came in and swallowed us up whole.

However, I still think GM being bought by anyone is highly unlikely.

GM has total assets of over $300 billion! That does not include spinoffs that answer directly to GM which total another $220 billion.

ben72227
11-28-05, 09:49 PM
I think it's highly unlikely that Toyota would want to buy GM. I mean, GM is a sinking ship, and if Toyota bought it, it would just completely sink and they'd lose a TON of money.

Rather, Toyota will just wait until the GM ship sinks, and then they will become masters of the seas...:devil:because with GM gone, people will be forced to buy Camrys:devil:

SilverCTS
11-28-05, 10:30 PM
GM has total assets of over $300 billion! That does not include spinoffs that answer directly to GM which total another $220 billion.

Aren't they cancelled out by the liabilities on the balance sheet?

In order to acquire GM, another company only needs to pay the shareholders their asking price. The current market cap is $13 billion not $12 billion, my mistake. That is how much it would cost to pay-off all the shareholders.

However, I am sure that the shareholders will want substantially more, a lot more. So, even if the asking price is $50 billion (totally overpriced), I am sure Toyota could come up with the cash.

There would probably be a stock swap involved and GM shareholders would love that, because they would finally get a good return on their investment. Toyota has a market cap of a $160 billion. Toyota is rich, rich like Exxon Mobil rich.

However, I just don't see any chance of this happening. Why would Toyota do this? It doesn't make sense.

It really sucks to be almost bankrupt.

90Brougham350
11-28-05, 11:11 PM
Nah, you guys are worrying way to much! GM will rebound; there's no chance of GM being baught by Toyota. Rumors are easy to spread and fun to talk about, but let's be realistic! GM will be GM for much time to come.

1enthusiast
11-29-05, 12:12 AM
GM has total assets of over $300 billion! That does not include spinoffs that answer directly to GM which total another $220 billion.

What matters when one company looks into buying another company is the positive cash flow, and GM right now has none of it. They have $19B in the bank, and it's dwindling fast. GMAC bank is costing them millions which is why it's up for sale, they lost $26.5M just with the failed employee discount sale, and the retiree/healthcare situation is costing GM even more millions. Their stock is rated at junk. GM could have a trillion dollars of assets, but it's all worthless if there's no solid financial foundation to support it.

It would be akin to you owning a $3 million mansion and having a million in the bank. Only each year your salary has been going down to the point you're making $8.00/hr. Now, you own the mansion outright, you have money in the bank, but the utilities for the house are $1500.00/month, and the taxes are $10,000.00/yr. Do you refinance the house to have money to pay for the expenses? How long before you have to sell the house and buy a smaller one?

The size of a company does not reflect it's current financial health. Which is why Toyota will NOT buy GM. It would cost Toyota more to make GM profitable again than they would actually pay to buy it.

Night Wolf
11-29-05, 07:23 AM
You're just joking, correct?

No.

SilverCTS
11-29-05, 08:17 AM
No.

After Toyota buys GM, Microsoft, Exxon Mobil, and then takes over the US government, is that when apes take over the planet and all humans become slaves?

http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a313/silvercts/PlanetoftheApes.jpg

Randy_W
11-29-05, 08:51 AM
Aren't they cancelled out by the liabilities on the balance sheet?

In order to acquire GM, another company only needs to pay the shareholders their asking price. The current market cap is $13 billion not $12 billion, my mistake. That is how much it would cost to pay-off all the shareholders.

However, I am sure that the shareholders will want substantially more, a lot more. So, even if the asking price is $50 billion (totally overpriced), I am sure Toyota could come up with the cash.

There would probably be a stock swap involved and GM shareholders would love that, because they would finally get a good return on their investment. Toyota has a market cap of a $160 billion. Toyota is rich, rich like Exxon Mobil rich.

However, I just don't see any chance of this happening. Why would Toyota do this? It doesn't make sense.

It really sucks to be almost bankrupt.

Assets do matter, cash flow is great and the reason to buy any company is to make a profit. However, when you buy a corporation in total, you get the assets and the debts. In this case it totals over $500 billion, Toyota doesn't have the cash. The Feds aren't going to let it happen anyway.:thumbsup:

SilverCTS
11-29-05, 01:41 PM
Assets do matter, cash flow is great and the reason to buy any company is to make a profit. However, when you buy a corporation in total, you get the assets and the debts. In this case it totals over $500 billion, Toyota doesn't have the cash. The Feds aren't going to let it happen anyway.:thumbsup:

You said it yourself. You get the assets and the debt.

$500 billion in assets minus $500 billion in debt = 0.

Corporate take overs don't work the way you say.

The market cap is only 13 billion. That is what you should base GM's takeover price at. Forget about assets and debt.

I do agree that there is zero shot of it happening anyway. But I have a different reason for thinking so. I just don't think anyone would buy GM because of all the issues it has.

Randy_W
11-29-05, 02:04 PM
You said it yourself. You get the assets and the debt.

$500 billion in assets minus $500 billion in debt = 0.

Corporate take overs don't work the way you say.

The market cap is only 13 billion. That is what you should base GM's takeover price at. Forget about assets and debt.

I do agree that there is zero shot of it happening anyway. But I have a different reason for thinking so. I just don't think anyone would buy GM because of all the issues it has.

Let's say that Toyucka buys GM for the current market cap 12.9 billion, then tomorrow the creditors can demand payment in full, (call in the notes), then Toyota would be liable for the whole $500 billion or whatever amount was called in, immediately. GM has contracts and insurance to cover that eventuality, when Toyota takes over, all that would be null and void. Toyota would then be responsible for the full debt, if they couldn't pay as per terms, they would be forced into bankruptcy.

SilverCTS
11-29-05, 02:09 PM
Let's say that Toyucka buys GM for the current market cap 12.9 billion, then tomorrow the creditors can demand payment in full, (call in the notes), then Toyota would be liable for the whole $500 billion or whatever amount was called in, immediately. GM has contracts and insurance to cover that eventuality, when Toyota takes over, all that would be null and void. Toyota would then be responsible for the full debt, if they couldn't pay as per terms, they would be forced into bankruptcy.

Correct. That is why Toyota will never buy GM. Because after they pay off the shareholders (for their asking price), they would be stuck with all the problems.

Here is the definition of Market Capitalization from Dictionary.Com.

market capitalization
n : an estimation of the value of a business that is obtained by multiplying the number of shares outstanding by the current price of a share. Also called market value.

To make it easier, assets and liabilities basically cancel each other out. You're not going to give GM $500 billion dollars for their assets when they have $500 billion in debt. Understand???

Lord Cadillac
11-29-05, 02:56 PM
Not a shot in Hell. GM will not be bought by Toyota, ever. GM is going to rebound. What, you think the company has never been through rough times before? What did everyone say back in '92? Does everyone think this is the end of GM? Ha.

In 1992, Toyota wasn't nearly what it is now.. Think about that before being so sure...

Lord Cadillac
11-29-05, 02:58 PM
If Toyota was to buy GM, would they necessarily need to take the pension and UAW baggage as well? Or could they just do away with the current setup and go about business they way they do now?


Maybe, but I don't think anyone would buy GM until they do some serious house cleaning.

Generally speaking, only healthy companies with a bright future are bought by other companies.

At this point, GM would come with a negative cash flow of about $2billion a year and all the pension plan / UAW baggage. Plus, Delphi, a GM spinoff, and it's largest part supplier just declared bankruptcy. Despite the bankruptcy, Delphi workers are threatening to strike, and this could choke GM's part supplies, and cause GM to lose even more money (believe it or not). Ultimately, GM might have to declare bankruptcy.

I'd really be surprised if Toyota wants any part of this...

Lord Cadillac
11-29-05, 02:59 PM
I believe Toyota WILL take GMs place in the market. I also think that if Toyota wanted to buy GM, they could keep at least half the current employees and Very quickly find replacements for those who don't like the new policies (union, healthcare, etcetera).


Nah, I dont think its so much about Toyota buying GM, as it is about Toyota more importantly wanting GM's *place* in the market. A takeover of GM would seem hostile and might have negative backlash, but no one could/would very much oppose a well engineered market dominance. It doesnt matter GM does or doesnt do if Toyota starts to eat away at all but the most loyal customer base it has.

Lord Cadillac
11-29-05, 03:02 PM
However, I still think GM being bought by anyone is highly unlikely.

Maybe GMT will be more likely. :p

SilverCTS
11-29-05, 03:02 PM
If Toyota was to buy GM, would they necessarily need to take the pension and UAW baggage as well? Or could they just do away with the current setup and go about business they way they do now?

Good point. They could payoff the shareholders and then own the rights to all the brand names. However, as have many already pointed out, Toyota would be stuck with a lot of other GM liabilities.

Lord Cadillac
11-29-05, 03:07 PM
If GM were to go bankrupt, what liabilities would remain?

SilverCTS
11-29-05, 03:23 PM
If GM were to go bankrupt, what liabilities would remain?

That would be decided by the courts, and creditors would be lining up down the street.

Randy_W
11-29-05, 04:18 PM
Correct. That is why Toyota will never buy GM. Because after they pay off the shareholders (for their asking price), they would be stuck with all the problems.

Here is the definition of Market Capitalization from Dictionary.Com.

market capitalization
n : an estimation of the value of a business that is obtained by multiplying the number of shares outstanding by the current price of a share. Also called market value.

To make it easier, assets and liabilities basically cancel each other out. You're not going to give GM $500 billion dollars for their assets when they have $500 billion in debt. Understand???

I understood all along, it's not what they have to pay up front that would prevent a buyout, it's the potential down the road cost.

SilverCTS
11-29-05, 04:19 PM
I believe Toyota WILL take GMs place in the market. I also think that if Toyota wanted to buy GM, they could keep at least half the current employees and Very quickly find replacements for those who don't like the new policies (union, healthcare, etcetera).

Toyota could easily buy GM from a financial perspective. We've already beat that dead horse pretty good.

I just don't see why they would do so.

Here is Toyota's stock chart for the last year. This is the chart of a very HEALTHY company. With these kind of returns, would Toyota shareholders ever go along with a GM buyout?

Toyota
http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a313/silvercts/Toyota.gif

By contrast, here is GM's stock chart for the year. This is the chart of a very sick company. This is what Toyota shareholders would get in return if GM was acquired.

GM
http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a313/silvercts/GM.gif

Lord Cadillac
11-29-05, 04:36 PM
By the looks of that chart, you're right. Nobody would want GM. I suppose they'll either get all kinds of help from our already ailing government (in debt), or they'll just fade away...

Playdrv4me
11-29-05, 07:40 PM
I think that a more likely scenario would be that GM would be picked over for parts rather than acquired altogether... In other words, someone might take Delphi, Cadillac, Saab etc separately rather than altogether.

Night Wolf
11-29-05, 08:43 PM
After Toyota buys GM, Microsoft, Exxon Mobil, and then takes over the US government, is that when apes take over the planet and all humans become slaves?
http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a313/silvercts/PlanetoftheApes.jpg

Yes.

Night Wolf
11-29-05, 08:46 PM
Toyota could easily buy GM from a financial perspective. We've already beat that dead horse pretty good.
I just don't see why they would do so.
Here is Toyota's stock chart for the last year. This is the chart of a very HEALTHY company. With these kind of returns, would Toyota shareholders ever go along with a GM buyout?
Toyota
http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a313/silvercts/Toyota.gif
By contrast, here is GM's stock chart for the year. This is the chart of a very sick company. This is what Toyota shareholders would get in return if GM was acquired.
GM
http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a313/silvercts/GM.gif

At first glance... it looks bad...

but on the GM chart, are those little triangles with E... splits?

because if so, then it kinda puts a whole new turn to the ball game ;) :)

RobertCTS
11-29-05, 09:52 PM
By the looks of that chart, you're right. Nobody would want GM. I suppose they'll either get all kinds of help from our already ailing government (in debt), or they'll just fade away...

Sal,
With respect, sorry to see you such a pessimist with GM USA.

ben72227
11-29-05, 10:07 PM
Sal,
With respect, sorry to see you such a pessimist with GM USA.

Pessimist? More like realists. GM is tanking right now, because of many things. The Unions, the competition, but mainly, their incompetence. I mean, who the hell the brings out an entire '07 line of almost all V8 trucks and SUV's, with gas prices fluctuating like they are...Even if gasoline does stablize again, people will still be cautious, and most likely go for the Honda Civic with VTEC and 40MPG highway...

If GM focused on their bread and butter cars (Impala, Cobalt, Malibu, G6, etc.) as much as they do on Cadillac or their truck/SUV lines, they would be (IMHO) MUCH better off than they are now...

Night Wolf
11-29-05, 10:49 PM
Pessimist? More like realists. GM is tanking right now, because of many things. The Unions, the competition, but mainly, their incompetence. I mean, who the hell the brings out an entire '07 line of almost all V8 trucks and SUV's, with gas prices fluctuating like they are...Even if gasoline does stablize again, people will still be cautious, and most likely go for the Honda Civic with VTEC and 40MPG highway...

If GM focused on their bread and butter cars (Impala, Cobalt, Malibu, G6, etc.) as much as they do on Cadillac or their truck/SUV lines, they would be (IMHO) MUCH better off than they are now...

hmmm, yeah, I would soo much rather buy a new Honda CR-V with a 4cylinder then a Tahoe with a V8 :bigroll:

You state one fact, but conviently leave the other out.... the fact that this whole line up of '07 V8 SUV's have a little thing called DoD.... thats Displacement on Demand.


My experience with the DOD system was very positive. It is totally transparent in operation. There is nothing visible under the hood that has changed - the mechanical changes are internal to the engine. The Vortec V8 engine was smooth and powerful yet fuel economy was very good. I experienced about 25 m.p.g. fuel economy during city driving and over 30 m.p.g. for some highway travel. From studying the scan tool readouts, I found the system is very sensitive to engine load so hills, higher speeds, wind direction and wind speed could all cause a significant difference in fuel economy. Even so, GM's claims of up to 25% improvement in fuel economy seem to be well founded.



http://www.canadiandriver.com/articles/jk/041020.htm

So a big huge GM V8 truck gets over 30mpg on the highway while a small POS, death trap of a Honda Civic gets 40mpg? Oh yeah, GM really has alot to catch up on :bigroll:

Yeah, GM dosn't give a damn about their "bread and butter" cars... lets see of the cars you mentioned....

Cobalt - 2.0L s/c Ecotec - 205hp @ 5,600RPM, 200ft-lbs torque @ 4,400RPM. 23/29mpg.

Malibu - sweet 3900 VVT pushrod, 240hp@ 6,000RPM, **241 ft-lbs torque @ 2,800RPM ** 90% of torque avalible form 1,800RPM-5,800RPM** Our 3500-equiped G6 got 34mpg on the highway... this should be close.

Oh yeah, this has more highway MPG then Honda Accord V6 AND Toyota Camery V6.... and was highest ranked entry level midsize in initial quality by JD Power & Associates.... yup, beat out Honda and Toyota.

Impala - Yeah, this is a fun one...303hp/323ft-lbs torque from a V8, yet it gets 28mpg on the highway... Where is Honda with a V8 in their Accord... oh wait.. Honda dosn't make a V8, thats right.

The G6 you can get the same sweet 3900, in 2-door with a 6spd manual, that looks far better then any Accord or Camry.

ben72227
11-30-05, 12:46 AM
hmmm, yeah, I would soo much rather buy a new Honda CR-V with a 4cylinder then a Tahoe with a V8

You state one fact, but conviently leave the other out.... the fact that this whole line up of '07 V8 SUV's have a little thing called DoD.... thats Displacement on Demand.

Well, the CR-V does have VTEC:thumbsup: and a better turning circle.

Besides, you left out the fact that DoD is a desperate attempt by GM to lure customers who are switching to the dark side (or as I like to say, Toyota) :histeric:

Correct me If I'm wrong, but didn't GM try this DoD thing before? Ah, yes, I remember now, the V8-6-4. Another one of your beloved pushrod engines:histeric:


So a big huge GM V8 truck gets over 30mpg on the highway while a small POS, death trap of a Honda Civic gets 40mpg? Oh yeah, GM really has alot to catch up on

I'd buy one. http://autos.msn.com/media/asx/iihs/00031.asx

But I guess you fail to mention that while the Honda got the highest safety ratings by the IIHS and was named a "Best Pick", YOUR GM SUV (Let's use the Trailblazer for my example, shall we?) BARELY received a "Marginal" rating, which is one step above complete FAILURE. Not to mention that those big V8 SUVs have a nasty habbit of "tipping over". Don't believe me? See for yourself:
http://www.iihs.org/ratings/rating.aspx?id=140


Cobalt - 2.0L s/c Ecotec - 205hp @ 5,600RPM, 200ft-lbs torque @ 4,400RPM. 23/29mpg.

Ah, the Cobalt. A valiant effort, but nothing special. The REGULAR engine, the one that most people can AFFORD, the 2.2L is NOISY, fuel thirsty, and just a substandard ECOTEC. But I see you probably already knew that and tried to bypass by posting the EXPENSIVE supercharged version, that nobody would want anyway, because they could just get an RX-8:D


Malibu - sweet 3900 VVT pushrod, 240hp@ 6,000RPM, **241 ft-lbs torque @ 2,800RPM ** 90% of torque avalible form 1,800RPM-5,800RPM** Our 3500-equiped G6 got 34mpg on the highway... this should be close.

Once again, you display the top of the line "SS" (what a joke) model. Again, nothing special - just another pushrod that the general public won't even look at:(


Impala - Yeah, this is a fun one...303hp/323ft-lbs torque from a V8, yet it gets 28mpg on the highway... Where is Honda with a V8 in their Accord... oh wait.. Honda dosn't make a V8, thats right.

I just find this one funny. You try to badmouth the Japs by posting the ULTIMATE POSER COPYCAT vehicle. Rather than make the Impala a great car, GM is playing catch-up to Honda. I mean, hell, they made the new Impala look even MORE bland (something I thought was impossible) and MORE unnatractive...hell, it's so damn ugly, I'd probably get a Ford 500 instead:histeric:

Well, that about does it. Looks like you just got pwned:crying:

I~LUV~Caddys8792
11-30-05, 01:14 AM
Well, that about does it. Looks like you just got owned:crying:

Hey now, lets not make this personal :tisk:

The reason the V-8-6-4 failed is because the technology wasn't there in 1981. Its another valiant attempt for GM :)

Also, I believe the solenoids could not stand up to the heat made by the motor, so they failed too.

ben72227
11-30-05, 01:24 AM
Hey now, lets not make this personal :tisk:

Meh:sneaky:

davesdeville
11-30-05, 04:58 AM
Pessimist? More like realists. GM is tanking right now, because of many things. The Unions, the competition, but mainly, their incompetence. I mean, who the hell the brings out an entire '07 line of almost all V8 trucks and SUV's, with gas prices fluctuating like they are...
Hmm, people who start development on said truck line before gas prices lost stability?

Well, the CR-V does have VTEC:thumbsup: and a better turning circle.
A better turning circle? Are you shittin me son, that's what you come up with?

Besides, you left out the fact that DoD is a desperate attempt by GM to lure customers who are switching to the dark side (or as I like to say, Toyota) :histeric:
Correct me If I'm wrong, but didn't GM try this DoD thing before? Ah, yes, I remember now, the V8-6-4. Another one of your beloved pushrod engines:histeric:
Yeah GM did DoD back in the day. The 8-6-4 system has a much worse rep than it deserves in the first place. But where it did go wrong, the root problem was the computer tech of the time. You should know what kind of computer tech improvements have been made since 1980. DoD works and whether you like it or not it's better than your precious VTEC for highway mileage. Oh, and VTEC was a desperate attempt to add some balls to weakling Hondas while still retaining one of their few good attributes, their economy.


But I guess you fail to mention that while the Honda got the highest safety ratings by the IIHS and was named a "Best Pick", YOUR GM SUV (Let's use the Trailblazer for my example, shall we?) BARELY received a "Marginal" rating, which is one step above complete FAILURE. Not to mention that those big V8 SUVs have a nasty habbit of "tipping over". Don't believe me? See for yourself:
http://www.iihs.org/ratings/rating.aspx?id=140

I dunno why anyone's comparing a Trailblazer to Honda cars. How about compare it to Hondas big SUV. Oh wait Honda doesn't make a big SUV.

Ah, the Cobalt. A valiant effort, but nothing special. The REGULAR engine, the one that most people can AFFORD, the 2.2L is NOISY, fuel thirsty, and just a substandard ECOTEC. But I see you probably already knew that and tried to bypass by posting the EXPENSIVE supercharged version, that nobody would want anyway, because they could just get an RX-8:D
The RX8 is a joke. There are so many cars that are faster, handle better, are cheaper, don't have a torqueless wonder under the hood, etc. It's hard to believe you're actually using that as an example of what's better than the Cobalt when it's maybe a couple tenths faster than a Cobalt SS for a lot more money. If you want a car to compare the Cobalt SS to, at least use something good like the SRT-4. Just FYI, NO ECONOMY CAR IS SPECIAL.

Once again, you display the top of the line "SS" (what a joke) model. Again, nothing special - just another pushrod that the general public won't even look at:(
I just find this one funny. You try to badmouth the Japs by posting the ULTIMATE POSER COPYCAT vehicle. Rather than make the Impala a great car, GM is playing catch-up to Honda. I mean, hell, they made the new Impala look even MORE bland (something I thought was impossible) and MORE unnatractive...hell, it's so damn ugly, I'd probably get a Ford 500 instead:histeric:
Well, that about does it. Looks like you just got pwned:crying:
Pwned? What kind of pimple faced nerd says that? Lets see, the Impala and Malibu have proven to be on the average more reliable than their Japanese counterparts. You and your ilk say "ohh but they're bland looking," once again are you kidding me? Japanese car fanboys whining about something being bland looking? If that's not the pot calling the kettle black I don't know what is.

RobertCTS
11-30-05, 06:11 AM
I'll bet a Happy Meal GM doesn't belly-up.:yup:

Playdrv4me
11-30-05, 06:21 AM
GM isnt going anywhere. In one way or another it, or some part of it will always be around.

Night Wolf
11-30-05, 07:53 AM
Davesdeville..... thanks :)

Randy_W
11-30-05, 08:44 AM
Well, the CR-V does have VTEC:thumbsup: and a better turning circle.

Besides, you left out the fact that DoD is a desperate attempt by GM to lure customers who are switching to the dark side (or as I like to say, Toyota) :histeric:

Correct me If I'm wrong, but didn't GM try this DoD thing before? Ah, yes, I remember now, the V8-6-4. Another one of your beloved pushrod engines:histeric:



I'd buy one. http://autos.msn.com/media/asx/iihs/00031.asx

But I guess you fail to mention that while the Honda got the highest safety ratings by the IIHS and was named a "Best Pick", YOUR GM SUV (Let's use the Trailblazer for my example, shall we?) BARELY received a "Marginal" rating, which is one step above complete FAILURE. Not to mention that those big V8 SUVs have a nasty habbit of "tipping over". Don't believe me? See for yourself:
http://www.iihs.org/ratings/rating.aspx?id=140



Ah, the Cobalt. A valiant effort, but nothing special. The REGULAR engine, the one that most people can AFFORD, the 2.2L is NOISY, fuel thirsty, and just a substandard ECOTEC. But I see you probably already knew that and tried to bypass by posting the EXPENSIVE supercharged version, that nobody would want anyway, because they could just get an RX-8:D



Once again, you display the top of the line "SS" (what a joke) model. Again, nothing special - just another pushrod that the general public won't even look at:(



I just find this one funny. You try to badmouth the Japs by posting the ULTIMATE POSER COPYCAT vehicle. Rather than make the Impala a great car, GM is playing catch-up to Honda. I mean, hell, they made the new Impala look even MORE bland (something I thought was impossible) and MORE unnatractive...hell, it's so damn ugly, I'd probably get a Ford 500 instead:histeric:

Well, that about does it. Looks like you just got pwned:crying:

Ben, you amaze me, I didn't know anyone could get that obnoxious in 17 years. You've become a 24/7 troll. Your knowlage is truely underwhelming!:rolleyes:

1enthusiast
11-30-05, 05:43 PM
The reason the V-8-6-4 failed is because the technology wasn't there in 1981. Its another valiant attempt for GM :)

Also, I believe the solenoids could not stand up to the heat made by the motor, so they failed too.

That sums up GM's attitude, and the attitude that less and less people are willing to accept every day. Which is, "let's try something new, if it works, great, if not, don't worry we can do better next time".

The automobile world of 2006 is a far cry from 1981. If you plan on being creative with some new innovation, it better work perfectly, every time, the first time, period. No excuses. Reason I say this is these new displacement on demand engines GM is making better run for 200,000 miles perfectly. They better not have even one single computer problem. There will be no turning back if they are prone to recalls, repairs, even the slightest oil leak or sepage will be unacceptable. Because it's part of what will make or break GM in the future.

Honda's verson of such technology which is in it's 3rd full production year is as reliable as their other engines. In the hybrid Accord, they use a 244 hp 3.0 liter V6 and an 18hp electric motor (for the battery charging). When you hit cruising speed on the freeway, half the cylinders shut down (same as GM DOD). They've not had one recall, not even on the first run prodction year.

Whether it's fair or not, the cold hard truth of the matter is for GM to survive, they must make perfect cars from here on out. The pressure is on them to hit home runs in every at bat, because quite honestly, that's the only thing that can really save them.

I~LUV~Caddys8792
11-30-05, 06:19 PM
I work in a Nissan dealership, and I was talking to the manager, and he said most of GM's problems stem from how many customers they angered from the mid '70s to the early '90s.

I have to agree with this, it makes logical sense

90Brougham350
11-30-05, 06:22 PM
VTEC engines had to be developed because there is no torque from those puny little engines where it's needed most. 95% of all driving is done under 3000 rpm, I believe this was already posted. Honda needed VTEC to compete. Anyone who says the 8-6-4 was a bad idea is nuts. The 8-6-4 is a true Cadillac idea. New and interesting technology that the competition doesn't have. Where they went wrong was dropping it after a year and immediately rushing to the 4100. Seriously, who wants a vehicle 221.5 inches long powered by a 4.1 liter. GM will build better vehicles because it has to. We can sit here and think all we want that GM is just sitting on its ass, doing nothing. I can only imagine what's been going on at GM lately!

DoD is a wonderful invention. It works well, and it does it's job without complaining. Does it save fuel? To some degree. Is it reliable? Yes. Do hybrids save fuel? Yes, as long as you don't drive faster than 18 mph or spend less than 90% of your time in the city. Are they reliable? Yes. Both systems work well and do what they were designed for.

As for GM's attitude, that used to be it. GM is changing its attitude. How can I be so sure? Because it's only common sense that if it doesn't, America will have 1.5 American car companies (can't count Chrysler, they're more kraut than detroit) and GM knows this. If they don't, they must be the biggest idiots in the world.

ben72227
11-30-05, 06:40 PM
How about compare it to Hondas big SUV. Oh wait Honda doesn't make a big SUV.

Way to be informed dave:sneaky: Honda does, infact, make a 7-seater SUV. It's called the PILOT...:rolleyes: And yes, it's safety ratings are "Best Pick" by IIHS:
http://www.hwysafety.org/ratings/rating.aspx?id=185


The RX8 is a joke. There are so many cars that are faster, handle better, are cheaper, don't have a torqueless wonder under the hood, etc.

My bad...My bad...Fine, RX-8 isn't a good comparison. But the Mustang V6 is.:highfive: Better engine that costs the same...


Just FYI, NO ECONOMY CAR IS SPECIAL.

Uh, Hello. Mazda3 SP23:thepan:


You and your ilk say "ohh but they're bland looking," once again are you kidding me? Japanese car fanboys whining about something being bland looking? If that's not the pot calling the kettle black I don't know what is.

You completely missed the point - It's not that they're bland looking; its that GM would sink so low to MAKE their cars bland just to get people to look at them. I mean, this is the company that is known for its car designs, yet they're trying to make their car look Jap. The IMPALA of all things - its a shame...


Ben, you amaze me, I didn't know anyone could get that obnoxious in 17 years. You've become a 24/7 troll. Your knowlage is truely underwhelming!:rolleyes:

Way to add something meaningful to the discussion Randy:rolleyes: Someoen should give you a pat on the back:cool:

Randy_W
11-30-05, 06:53 PM
Way to be informed dave:sneaky: Honda does, infact, make a 7-seater SUV. It's called the PILOT...:rolleyes: And yes, it's safety ratings are "Best Pick" by IIHS:
http://www.hwysafety.org/ratings/rating.aspx?id=185



My bad...My bad...Fine, RX-8 isn't a good comparison. But the Mustang V6 is.:highfive: Better engine that costs the same...



Uh, Hello. Mazda3 SP23:thepan:



You completely missed the point - It's not that they're bland looking; its that GM would sink so low to MAKE their cars bland just to get people to look at them. I mean, this is the company that is known for its car designs, yet they're trying to make their car look Jap. The IMPALA of all things - its a shame...



Way to add something meaningful to the discussion Randy:rolleyes: Someoen should give you a pat on the back:cool:

How about the Pilot is a stretched to the max Accord platform, with a severely under powered V6 for a truck that size, if you can call it a truck. That abomination they call a pick up truck, (Ridgeline, what a name),is nothing but a yuppie's excuse for a tree hugger's truck. Hook my Donzi behind it and head for the boat ramp!! You better have it in 4wd, because the front wheels won't be touching the ground. By the way, hybrid tech is great, if you're going to keep it the 27 years it takes on average to make up for the extra cost, in fuel savings!! I got several of those pats on the back, by way of pm's, thanks.:highfive:

Kev
11-30-05, 06:55 PM
Just a reminder to all;

Keep the discussions civil if you want to avoid having the thread closed.

No name calling, keep personal insults out.
Please be respectful to each other, there is no need for personal attacks or flaming nor will flame-baiting be looked upon kindly.

With that being said, Ben, your last post was an improvement, please keep up the trend, thank you.

ben72227
11-30-05, 07:06 PM
How about the Pilot is a stretched to the max Accord platform, with a severely under powered V6 for a truck that size, if you can call it a truck. That abomination they call a pick up truck, (Ridgeline, what a name),is nothing but a yuppie's excuse for a tree hugger's truck. Hook my Donzi behind it and head for the boat ramp!! You better have it in 4wd, because the front wheels won't be touching the ground. By the way, hybrid tech is great, if you're going to keep it the 27 years it takes on average to make up for the extra cost, in fuel savings!! I got several of those pats on the back, by way of pm's, thanks.:highfive:

Really, look. Honda makes like 8 cars. GM makes over 40. And as EVERYONE knows, Honda's number one concern is fuel efficiency and reliability in econocars, and they're very good at what they do.

GM, on the other hand, isn't really good at anything except for laying off (most recently 30,000) American workers and having incompetent management.:sneaky:

Now, if you don't like the Ridgeline/PILOT, fine. Nobody is making you buy one. But dave's original post was that Honda DIDN'T make a large SUV, and I said they do. And it should have ended there:rolleyes:

But, if the Ridgeline isnt' your thing, get a Tundra. It's common knowledge that if you want a good truck, you had better get a Toyota. They last, they haul, and they dont' break down.

And before someone comes back and says - "Jap trucks are crap, they're death box POS, etc.", look at this video (It's a Top Gear episode, so I know you'll watch it:sneaky: ) where they put the Toyota Tacoma (called the Hilux in the U.K.) through hell and back. Now, lets see a Chevy S-10, (oops, I mean Colorado:lildevil: ) do that...:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/topgear/prog28/hilux_broadband.ram

I~LUV~Caddys8792
11-30-05, 07:25 PM
And before someone comes back and says - "Jap trucks are crap, they're death box POS, etc.", look at this video (It's a Top Gear episode, so I know you'll watch it:sneaky: ) where they put the Toyota Tacoma (called the Hilux in the U.K.) through hell and back. Now, lets see a Chevy S-10, (oops, I mean Colorado:lildevil: ) do that...:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/topgear/prog28/hilux_broadband.ram

That video was amazing! I saw that on Top Gear a couple of months ago.

90Brougham350
11-30-05, 07:38 PM
But, if the Ridgeline isnt' your thing, get a Tundra. It's common knowledge that if you want a good truck, you had better get a Toyota. They last, they haul, and they dont' break down.

And before someone comes back and says - "Jap trucks are crap, they're death box POS, etc.", look at this video (It's a Top Gear episode, so I know you'll watch it:sneaky: ) where they put the Toyota Tacoma (called the Hilux in the U.K.) through hell and back. Now, lets see a Chevy S-10, (oops, I mean Colorado:lildevil: ) do that...:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/topgear/prog28/hilux_broadband.ram

Common knowledge eh? According to you? Go ahead and read your magazine reviews, go ahead and watch TV. We shouldn't have to get back to trucks, but apparently you're insisting. American car companies built trucks because American use trucks. Japanese car companies built trucks because they had to to stay competitive. I don't care how much you say a Tundra is a good truck. At the end of the day, I'll still drive an F-150 or a Silverado. I'm not even posting numbers! I'm just typing what most of us believe. Would anyone care to post some specs?